Paul Tolhurst TV Superstar???

mailman71 · Post by **mailman71** » 17 Dec 2009, 20:41

why does'nt tolhurst get of his ar-e and try the lad on tv's round to see if it can be done,the biggest problem with royal mail is that in the past few years they have installed people at the top who have never done the job.
if tolhurst was'nt embarresed by this programme then he should be.

Post by **Running Man** » 17 Dec 2009, 22:42

Seems to me that Paul Tolhurst is every bit as popular as Adam Crozier and Mark Higson!

What baffles me about Royal Mail Group, and I'm including Post Office Ltd., is how we manage to attract such complete and utter imbeciles to occupy senior Management positions.
It surely cannot be coincidence that we consistently replace such inept and clueless people at the top of our business with ones that are even worse!

As a Counters employee I thought we could not possibly find anybody worse than David Mills to run our business but we did, together with a whole team of people who seem intent on running our once great business into the ground.

I'm sure that posties everywhere were ecstatic to hear that Allan Leighton was stepping down as things surely couldn't get any worse in Royal Mail but, please correct me if I'm wrong here, things went from bad to worse to terrible to absolutely unbelievable!!!

When will the senior managers in the whole of Royal Mail Group (I am loathe to use the word leaders) realise that they cannot and will not get what they want by simply dictating to our staff what is required and doing all they can to bully us into submission.

Gobshites the lot of them- without exception!

bogstandard · Post by **bogstandard** » 18 Dec 2009, 09:41

it seems that at least one of the qualities required is a lack of moral direction

norbert · Post by **norbert** » 18 Dec 2009, 10:25

bogstandard wrote:it seems that at least one of the qualities required is a lack of moral direction

these identikit " manageralists " are looking to be head hunted , I wonder if Panorama will be on his DVD

" When will the senior managers in the whole of Royal Mail Group (I am loathe to use the word leaders) realise that they cannot and will not get what they want by simply dictating to our staff what is required and doing all they can to bully us into submission."

they want staff softened up and the stuffing knocked out of them for privatisation as most Parcel Firms have a paranoid anxiety about the CWU , Boardroom Bullies that try and steamroller people , the rot or the cancer starts at the top

.

A former RM Senior HR manager was scathingly critical of this time wasting policy of brinksmanship .

Yahoorsur · Post by **Yahoorsur** » 18 Dec 2009, 12:25

http://postinsight.com/files/Innovation ... lhurst.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some of Paul's work.
oh and if any of you want to get to know Paul,as Im sure you do,given that he does look in on here from time to time (allegedy),http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/paul-tolhurst/11/865/b25

Im almost tempted to sign up to view Paul's full profile,but then again Im scared of what I might find

norbert · Post by **norbert** » 18 Dec 2009, 12:51

Yahoorsur wrote:http://postinsight.com/files/Innovation ... lhurst.pdf

Some of Paul's work.
oh and if any of you want to get to know Paul,as Im sure you do,given that he does look in on here from time to time (allegedy),http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/paul-tolhurst/11/865/b25

Im almost tempted to sign up to view Paul's full profile,but then again Im scared of what I might find

very happy clappy and blue sky ?

so much 90's corporate B/S

- " the brave new world "

Are those " staff " on Prozac or are they smiling as they are on the fiddle ?

Somebody who'd worked for another haulier was scathingly critical of RM's transport operation , he couldn't believe how much diesel was wasted with empty wagons going up and down and how badly organised it was and how easy it was for the whole thing to come crashing down if someone had cocked up . He said it was all arse about face

.

They'd need one of those wagons to keep his ego ( sign of a bully ? ) in

- unreal ! - the irony is that Ricky Gervias did Brent training videos as a example as how not to do things

http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/paul-tolhurst/11/865/b25" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; - the interesting bit is the MBA in management , fair play for getting through Open University but no wonder there's so many Stepford Senior Managers

jaja · Post by **jaja** » 18 Dec 2009, 13:33

Re: Paul Tolhurst TV Superstar??? no but he is a f***ing tosser

OnAFlyer · Post by **OnAFlyer** » 18 Dec 2009, 14:42

jaja wrote:Re: Paul Tolhurst TV Superstar??? no but he is a f***ing tosser

Yep. A thoroughly unpleasant and insincere piece of work who refuses to acknowledge that any postie has a full workload. If he really thinks that then why doesn't he go and do the walk that was on Panorama for a week?

Caniel · Post by **Caniel** » 18 Dec 2009, 14:48

TrueBlueTerrier wrote:Apparently checking into the story, (I do that rather than just accepting what the press say) their wages, BA Cabin Staff is only about £20,000 a year. The extra allowances that put it up to £30,000 + is the expense they are allowed to claim. Those expenses are caused because of the way BA have to operate (Crew Rest Time) meaning staff have to stay on the ground for a certain amount of time. Are we really saying that the extra expense incurred by them doing the job should come out of their wages. Expenses like, Hotel Rooms (or should they buy a house at each destination they visit), food (or perhaps the should take a packed lunch to last 3 days), Uniform Cleaning and preparation, travel expenses to and from the Destination Airport.

As to the job they do - well its like the Room of Doom but multiplied 300 times and you are all encased in a metal tube for 12 hours. You are at the beck and call of people too lazy to get up and get a pillow, who want to complain about the film. Not forgetting looking after drunks, coping with Air Rage, being a sales assistant, being a travel compendium when people ask questions about their destination, being responsible for Air Safety, and those briefings which everyone ignores.

In the event of an Emergency evacuation they are LAST of the aircraft, and on certain occasions will have to check everyone is safely off. Remember the Hudson river crash where everyone got off - well who was responsible for that the Cockpit Crew - No - The cabin crew totally.

There's also the health risks from flying so much at high altitude, I might be wrong but I read somewhere or saw it on a documentary that your exposed to more cosmic radiation from the sun at high altitudes; which can increase the risk of cancer.

norbert · Post by **norbert** » 18 Dec 2009, 14:57

" There's also the health risks from flying so much at high altitude, I might be wrong but I read somewhere or saw it on a documentary that your exposed to more cosmic radiation from the sun at high altitudes; which can increase the risk of cancer."

I know O'Leary wanted the shades on the windows taken off so it was cheaper to clean the Ryanair plane windows - great

- other ideas were a £ to use the toilet and passengers loaded their own luggage into the hold

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 18 Dec 2009, 15:23

Is it just me or has this thread gone very wrong.

I thought this was the Paul Tolhurst "what a w*nker thread.
BTW I think it's only a matter of time before he is "removed",he has obviously been promoted beyond his capabilities.

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 18 Dec 2009, 16:12

fishtank wrote:Is it just me or has this thread gone very wrong.

I thought this was the Paul Tolhurst "what a w*nker thread.
BTW I think it's only a matter of time before he is "removed",he has obviously been promoted beyond his capabilities.

The Peter Principle written large in life:

The Peter Principle is the principle that "In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence." It was formulated by Dr. Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull in their 1969 book The Peter Principle, a humorous treatise which also introduced the "salutary science of Hierarchiology", "inadvertently founded" by Peter. It holds that in a hierarchy, members are promoted so long as they work competently. Sooner or later they are promoted to a position at which they are no longer competent (their "level of incompetence"), and there they remain, being unable to earn further promotions. This principle can be modeled and has theoretical validity. Peter's Corollary states that "in time, every post tends to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out his duties" and adds that "work is accomplished by those employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence".

norbert · Post by **norbert** » 18 Dec 2009, 16:13

fishtank wrote:Is it just me or has this thread gone very wrong.

I thought this was the Paul Tolhurst "what a w*nker thread.
BTW I think it's only a matter of time before he is "removed",he has obviously been promoted beyond his capabilities.

Sorry partially my fault - suppose there's a tenuous connection - all these idiots in charge

Post by **POSTMAN** » 18 Dec 2009, 18:01

Can you imagine tolly the tool doing a walk today?

norbert · Post by **norbert** » 18 Dec 2009, 19:01

" tolly the tool"